brickipediafandomcom-20200229-history
Forum:Spoiler template
I've seen the new spoiler template, personally I'm not really a big fan of it. This is mainly because it says "highlight", and for 2/3 browsers I've tested, all I get is a highlighted rectangle with no text. And also, should everyone have to highlight stuff just to read it? Maybe a template more like Wookieepedia's would be better? Just a thought. 05:06, May 25, 2011 (UTC) :Where is it? (Randy in Boise has spoken.) FB100Z • talk • 05:07, May 25, 2011 (UTC) ::Ah, found it. Simply horrible. My recommendation would be to use something akin to HideMe, or maybe Wikipedia's old system. FB100Z • talk • 05:09, May 25, 2011 (UTC) :::We definatly need a spoiler template for sensible future information, but I see the problem. Something collapsible might work. 12:24, May 25, 2011 (UTC) * I'm thinking more stlye. (I'm looking at the layout, not the content.) (Feel free to edit that.) 18:19, May 26, 2011 (UTC) :What's with the FA icons? Nice idea, though. FB100Z • talk • 20:04, May 26, 2011 (UTC) :: Per FB100Z, I like the idea, but don't really understand having FA icons there. 23:52, May 26, 2011 (UTC) :::They would be a different image. The FA one was just the first image I found. 17:51, May 27, 2011 (UTC) *What about containing all of the "spoiler" content in a collapsible box? 23:55, May 26, 2011 (UTC) * Personally I'd go for the above example, that way it takes no effort to read the material (ie, you don't have to go and click somewhere just to read something), and no effort to skip over it (just keep scrolling until you see "spoilers end") 01:01, May 27, 2011 (UTC) ** Of course, we should use more specific delimiter text. Something like, "Spoiler warning: Plot or ending details are revealed below" and "Spoiler ends here." FB100Z • talk • 03:08, May 27, 2011 (UTC) ** I mean having somethingh collapsible, opening by clicking. That way it does not mess up anything with the two skins. 12:50, May 27, 2011 (UTC) *** Actually, collapsible stuff messes it up more than static delimiters. The latter is also more friendly to screen readers. FB100Z • talk • 19:44, May 27, 2011 (UTC) * I've created and set it up such that if the code from here replaces the code currently in , the content will appear how it's usually seen with such templates, and there won't be any need to go around manually changing anything, except for removing . So, is this ok to implement? 05:11, June 18, 2011 (UTC) *:Why don't we go with a professional hideme popup like MLNwiki? 05:15, June 18, 2011 (UTC) *::Oppose as per the reason I had above. 05:53, June 18, 2011 (UTC) * (a bit off-topic): when should we even use this template? I've been noticing it's been used on Harry Potter pages a fair bit recently, but the plot of Hp7 has been public knowledge for about 4 years now, so it's not exactly new information, we all know Voldemort dies. Also, what about if some other material has a direct impact on the background (I can't think of one right now, but say for example it says on Luke Skywalker's page he died and became a ghost, and for whatever reason it's needed in the article). What would we do then? Would that section have a spoiler template over it and for how long? 05:53, June 18, 2011 (UTC) *I say we use the HideMe template. My LEGO Network Wiki uses it. Here is the link. 20:19, June 18, 2011 (UTC) *Note: I created HideMe to hide small in-text references to secret Networkers, Items, and the like, so it may not be 100% suitable to hide whole sections or paragraphs. If we decide to use it, I'll probably have to tweak it a bit when porting over here. FB100Z • talk • 17:08, June 23, 2011 (UTC) * (On ) No thanks to the pink! 17:15, June 23, 2011 (UTC) ** ?? What pink? The only colours coded into it are dark grey and black, and I've never seen any other colour for it :S 01:58, June 25, 2011 (UTC) *** There is a slightly pinkish tint to the start and end delimiters. Gender associations aside, I personally have no problem with it. FB100Z • talk • 02:10, June 25, 2011 (UTC) **** :S I'm not seeing it personally, must be a browser (or maybe skin) difference. Weird that that happens though. Are you seeing it in the above example by NXT? If not, I can switch it out for that one (without the FA icons, and rewording the headings), but we should probably work out which concept we're going to go with first. 06:48, June 26, 2011 (UTC) *Should I move this to the watercooler? It's a pretty minor issue. :* NO! Stop noving stuff to the watercooler FBZ, nobody(ish) goes there. 16:04, June 27, 2011 (UTC)FB100Z • talk • 02:11, June 25, 2011 (UTC) *I desperately want a HideMe template - they look more professional as opposed to our current one. 02:22, June 25, 2011 (UTC) Vote Keep as is Use a template in a similar style to # 06:48, June 26, 2011 (UTC) # But not the pink 16:03, June 27, 2011 (UTC) Use a "HideMe" template # 06:51, June 26, 2011 (UTC) # Aren't we supposed to use the new style of Community discussion/voting? 06:52, June 26, 2011 (UTC) Comments : @Tatooine: No result has ever been given on the forum, so the current voting system is still the normal numbered one. 07:07, June 26, 2011 (UTC) :: So? There are no official processes on this wiki, per WP:IAR. FB100Z • talk • 02:45, June 27, 2011 (UTC) ::: We are not Wikipedia (it's getting really old...) 04:10, June 27, 2011 (UTC) ::::Per above - I've been hearing this "Per Wikipedia" stuff a LOT lately. 04:33, June 27, 2011 (UTC) :::::Now just wait a cotton-pickin' minute here! You're saying IAR doesn't apply? That is completely contrary to a consensus we recently had on another forum, and you know it. I don't care whether we're Wikipedia or not; IAR is the focus here. FB100Z • talk • 17:19, June 27, 2011 (UTC) ::::::*My Impressedness at your knowledge of wikipedia's policies and their redirects is growing by the minute, FBZ. 17:23, June 27, 2011 (UTC) :::::::*Why, thank you...I think... FB100Z • talk • 23:55, June 28, 2011 (UTC) ::::::We have UCS, not IAR. Is it really common sense to argue about this here, in an unrelated forum, instead of just voting so we can move on and actually do something? 23:08, June 27, 2011 (UTC) :::::::I tried to advocate having both IAR and UCS, but the consensus was just UCS. IAR is currently an underlying and implied principle that comes out of UCS, and it would be really nice if it was more than that. FB100Z • talk • 23:55, June 28, 2011 (UTC) Revive I've just added some CSS so links are automatically hidden with , so you do not need to use .